DiscussMormonism.com

Oregon’s Bureau of Labor and Industries has ruled that the owners of the ‘Sweet Cakes by Melissa’ bakery must pay $135,000 in damages for refusing to serve a same-sex couple in 2013.

Under Oregon law, businesses cannot discriminate or refuse service based on sexual orientation, just as they cannot turn customers away because of race, sex, disability, age or religion.

The Oregon Equality Act of 2007 includes an exemption for religious organizations and schools, but does not allow private business owners to deny service and unlawfully discriminate against potential customers.

In the ruling, Oregon Labor Commissioner Brad Avakian explicitly stated that Oregon laws prohibit refusal of service to protected classes for discriminatory reasons:

This case is not about a wedding cake or a marriage. It is about a business’s refusal to serve someone because of their sexual orientation. Under Oregon law, that is illegal.

Within Oregon’s public accommodations law is the basic principle of human decency that every person, regardless of their sexual orientation, has the freedom to fully participate in society. The ability to enter public places, to shop, to dine, to move about unfettered by bigotry.

EAllusion wrote:I favor the right of private business owners to refuse service to anyone for whatever reason they want. However, I recognize my view is currently in the minority.

EAllusion wrote:I favor the right of private business owners to refuse service to anyone for whatever reason they want. However, I recognize my view is currently in the minority. I hold people who favor banning businesses from discriminating against blacks, but want to allow discrimination against gays, in low regard.

consiglieri wrote:I thought America was supposed to be about the individual's right to be an asshole.

Themis wrote:

EAllusion wrote:I favor the right of private business owners to refuse service to anyone for whatever reason they want. However, I recognize my view is currently in the minority.

Hopefully it will always be in the minority. I can agree that a business should be able to refuse service for a multitude of reasons. Even some that are quite trivial like, I don't feel like it. I disagree that we should be able to for some reasons like race, sex, culture, religion, etc. This is why it was important to write these into law in order to protect the rights of everyone.

Enzo the Baker wrote:

EAllusion wrote:I favor the right of private business owners to refuse service to anyone for whatever reason they want. However, I recognize my view is currently in the minority. I hold people who favor banning businesses from discriminating against blacks, but want to allow discrimination against gays, in low regard.

I'm with you, EA. As ugly as bigotry is, I don't believe gov't on any level should have the power to penalize anyone and or business for their thick-headed prejudices. The way to defeat the small-mindedness is by not patronizing the offending establishments. Organized boycotting would either close the business or effect the desired change.

EAllusion wrote:I favor the right of private business owners to refuse service to anyone for whatever reason they want. However, I recognize my view is currently in the minority. I hold people who favor banning businesses from discriminating against blacks, but want to allow discrimination against gays, in low regard.